Some thoughts on God, the Bible, theology, history, culture, and a few other things.

What’s the point of theology?

You who know me know that I’m a theology nerd. I can’t get enough of it. I read systematics for fun. They keep me awake at night.

But I have to keep a watch on myself. The beauty of how a doctrine is formulated and connected with other doctrines leaves me awestruck. But the beauty of a system is (should) always be surpassed by the beauty of Jesus, who is the reason we want to know theology.

We want to know Jesus more. That’s why theology matters. All doctrine, if rooted in the Bible, should make us love him more. One of my favorite systematicians, John L. Dagg (the first Southern Baptist to write and publish a systematic theology), stated this well in his Manual of Theology:

The study of religious truth ought to be undertaken and prosecuted from a sense of duty, and with a view to the improvement of the heart. When learned, it ought not to be laid on the shelf, as an object of speculation; but it should be deposited deep in the heart, where its sanctifying power ought to be felt. To study theology, for the purpose of gratifying curiosity, or preparing for a profession, is an abuse and profanation of what ought to be regarded as most holy. To learn things pertaining to God, merely for the sake of amusement, or secular advantage, or to gratify the mere love of knowledge, is to treat the Most High with contempt. (13)

As religious beings, let us seek to understand the truths of religion. As immortal beings, let us strive to make ourselves acquainted with the doctrine on which our everlasting happiness depends. And let us be careful that we do not merely receive it coldly into our understandings, but that its renewing power is ever operative in our hearts. (18)

Love to God will render it a pleasing task to examine the proofs of his existence, and to study those glorious attributes which render him the worthy object of supreme affection. Let us enter on this study, prompted by holy love, and a strong desire that our love may be increased. (49)

So we must guard against knowing Bible for the sake of knowing Bible.

The flip side of this is that we must resist the strain of faith that says, “I’m spiritual, not religious. I have a relationship, not a religion. I don’t need theology.”

Really? What kind of relationship is that in which you are satisfied with what you know of the other person and have no interest in have a greater understand of the person?

Imagine going on a date. You know the basics of the other person. She shares her name, occupation, and a bit more. She’s lovely, you think. But on the next date, as she starts to tell you more about herself — her likes and dislikes, childhood memories, favorite songs, desires and plans for the future — you gingerly put your finger to her lips. “Shhh,” you whisper, “I don’t need to know anything else about you. I know enough to know that I like you. Let’s just enjoy our relationship.”

That’s silly. If you like the girl and have an interest in the relationship, you want to know everything about her!

Knowing Jesus begins with the gospel: the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus for sinners. But if you really love Jesus, don’t you want to know him more? Don’t you want to plumb the depths of the incarnation? Don’t you desire to mediate on the glories of the atonement? Is there no urge to climb up to the heights of heaven and gaze upon him as he is seated next to the Father? Isn’t there a hunger to find his presence on every page of the Scriptures? To see him promised in the prophets? To see him praise by the Apostle Paul?

That’s what theology is (should be) about. So if you haven’t spent a lot of time doing theology, I recommend you purchase Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology. Work through it in your personal times of study. Go slow. Take your time. And don’t skip the questions for application at the end of each chapter.

2 thoughts on “What’s the point of theology?”

I read last night in a commentary on Romans that in 3:22 and 3:26, Martin Luther translated “pistis Iesou Christou” as faith in Jesus Christ as opposed to faith of Jesus Christ – which makes a difference. I’ve got to read other commentaries, but it is an interesting theological dilemma. Have you come across an explanation that you like to the “in” or “of” question?